Why Can't the Major Parties Produce Good Candidates? Why Can't We Elect Good Candidates?

[dblack]

Conceding to what? I said it was stupid, what is that "conceding?" You just see what you want. You'd be a lot less confusing if you just admitted you're a Democrat ...

Keep wankin'.

and your primary political view is hating Republicans. Yeah, Republicans suck, but it's your not being bothered by socialists while saying you're a libertarian that makes no sense

I'm not surprise my views make no sense to you.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I know most people are here for the two-party food fight, so this thread likely won't get much traction, but it seems we have a real problem with our election system. Neither party seems capable of, or interested in, nominating someone who will be a good leader for the country as a whole. And voters can't seem to break out of the habit of voting for Ds or Rs no matter how bad the candidates are. Why is that? And how can we fix it?

In my view, strategic voting (lesser-of-two-evils) is the biggest culprit. It tells us that we need to vote for bad candidates because the "other guy" is even worse. Fear is an easy sell, so the parties lean heavily on this strategy, spending most of their time demonizing the opponent rather than holding up the virtues of their candidate (which are virtually non-existent). Ranked choice would eliminate lesser-of-two-evils voting and finally allow voters to vote "against" candidates they find unacceptable (by ranking them last). This would discourage divisive partisan fear mongering and make it more likely that consensus seeking candidates are elected.

There other problems, of course, and I'm curious what you all think they are. Although, to be clear, I'm not talking about corruption or "stolen" elections. I'm talking about the systemic problems with the way we're doing elections that make it seemingly impossible for good leaders to get elected.

“Why Can't the Major Parties Produce Good Candidates?”

They do – but they’re rejected by the voters.

“Why Can't We Elect Good Candidates?”

Because the voters reject them.

The people deserve the bad government they get; the people are solely responsible for the bad government they get.

The problem isn’t the parties, just as ‘both sides’ aren’t ‘the same.’

The problem is lack of political participation and an unwillingness to be politically involved.

 

[kaz]

I agree. He is a rare exception to the rule. The vast majority of third party candidates are wacked out freaks with terrible ideas.

Assuming Trump and Biden are the nominees, I'll look to the Libertarian Party next. I don't like most of their candidates either these days, so next on my list would be RFK Junior, so it's a good chance I'll vote for him. Obviously a lot could happen before that and I'll consider any other third party, but from where we are now that's what I see

 

[dblack]

“Why Can't the Major Parties Produce Good Candidates?”

They do – but they’re rejected by the voters.

“Why Can't We Elect Good Candidates?”

Because the voters reject them.

The people deserve the bad government they get; the people are solely responsible for the bad government they get.

The problem isn’t the parties, just as ‘both sides’ aren’t ‘the same.’

The problem is lack of political participation and an unwillingness to be politically involved.

Agree with most of this - though I do think there are systemic factors that proper the two-party death spiral, factors that, if changed, would produce better results without an "upgrade" to voter intelligence.

But I have to challenge this part:

The problem is lack of political participation and an unwillingness to be politically involved.

I think the opposite is true. We have far too many "activists" in politics as it is. Too many people zealous about winning the "culture war" via government. Too many people who think the purpose of government is to force their values on the rest of society. This is what drives the hardened partisanship and the fear mongering. We need leaders who get this and recognize that, while "elections have consequences", that doesn't mean the winners can fuck the losers blind.

 

[kaz]

Keep wankin'.

I'm not surprise my views make no sense to you.

Agreed, a libertarian would never understand what the fuck you're talking about. We both know that because every libertarian on the site tells you that.

Hint, libertarian doesn't mix with socialist. See how that works?

 

[dblack]

Agreed, a libertarian would never understand what the fuck you're talking about. We both know that because every libertarian on the site tells you that.

Hint, libertarian doesn't mix with socialist. See how that works?

 

[kaz]

LOL, Democrats, always go to emotions. That patting is for you, gay boy

 

[dblack]

LOL, Democrats, always go to emotions. That patting is for you, gay boy

You've got the partisan drone delusion that everyone who disagrees with you is on "the other side". Whatever. You fuckers are lost.

 

[kaz]

You've got the partisan drone delusion that everyone who disagrees with you is on "the other side". Whatever. You fuckers are lost.

You say that like I'm the one who stopped calling myself a libertarian because every libertarian on the site told me I'm not one. That was you, Cowboy.

I don't think your views are Democrat, but you identify with them and aren't afraid of them and what they are doing, which is fucking stupid

 

[dblack]

You say that like I'm the one who stopped calling myself a libertarian because every libertarian on the site told me I'm not one. That was you, Cowboy.

I have no interest in your tortured conception of libertarianism. You voted for a populist, nationalist douche bag. Presumably, you'll do so again. That's the problem.

I don't think your views are Democrat, but you identify with them and aren't afraid of them and what they are doing, which is fucking stupid

You're right that I'm not "afraid" of them. I'm not afraid of Republicans either. I'm afraid of idiot voters who vote for bad candidates intentionally - and why do they do that? Because they are afraid. You're afraid. They've scared you into voting for bad candidates. Grow a pair and stop falling for it.

 

[kaz]

I have no interest in your tortured conception of libertarianism

One side:

Kaz and every other libertarian

Other side

dblack:

I'm not the one torturing libertarian. You need to pick a new word for someone who wants small government and kisses the butt of socialists.

And you clearly do hate Republicans. You can mince words over "afraid" versus "hate," but you have no fear or negative view of Democrats at all and you despise Republicans. That's fine, but you aren't actually libertarian. Either my small government kind or oddball's anarchy kind. You trust people who love, love, love big government

 

[dblack]

One side:

Kaz and every other libertarian

Whatever. You clearly associate with a different crowd than I do.

I'm not the one torturing libertarian.

Like I said, not interested. Suffice it to say, that whatever you call your politics - I'm not that.

And you clearly do hate Republicans.

Not all of them. Just populist, nationalist douchebags like you.

 

[kaz]

Whatever. You clearly associate with a different crowd than I do.

Like I said, not interested. Suffice it to say, that whatever you call your politics - I'm not that.

Not all of them. Just populist, nationalist douchebags like you.

And yet you're the only libertarian around who gets all warm and fuzzy about government loving leftists. Who are these libertarians you hang around with who agree with your view that you can only trust people who absolutely love government?

 

[dblack]

And yet you're the only libertarian ...

Again, I can't care about your twisted political definitions, nor your pathetic excuses. Call yourself whatever you'll like. I'll continue to call you out for voting for shit. People like you keep us mired in populist idiocy. I refuse to cave, and you hate me for it.

 

[kaz]

Again, I can't care about your twisted political definitions, nor your pathetic excuses. Call yourself whatever you'll like. I'll continue to call you out for voting for shit. People like you keep us mired in populist idiocy. I refuse to cave, and you hate me for it.

I know a lot of libertarians who hate Republicans you don't stand out. I know one libertarian who loves Democrats, you

 

[dblack]

I know a lot of libertarians who hate Republicans you don't stand out. I know one libertarian who loves Democrats, you

You know quite a lot that isn't true. The mark of a real partisan drone.

You are what you vote. Have you ever voted for a libertarian? Or do you always vote Republican?

 

[kaz]

You know quite a lot that isn't true. The mark of a real partisan drone.

You are what you vote. Have you ever voted for a libertarian? Or do you always vote Republican?

I like how you keep trying to make it sound like I'm the one out on my own here when you are. If you're secure in your views, why the dishonesty? You obviously grew up with Democrats or have some emotional connection to them that includes their hatred of Republicans. Why does it bother you to admit that? That's why I can't stop screwing with you over this, the dishonesty. If you addressed it honestly once, I'd say OK and move on

 

[j-mac]

Again...what in blazes are you talking about?

I guess you are …

 

[boedicca]

Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy:

The currency of Politics is Power. Most normal and decent people do not crave power over others - we just want to be left alone. Hence, the worst of the worst crawl to the top of the slime pile.

 

[dblack]

I like how you keep trying to make it sound like I'm the one out on my own here when you are. If you're secure in your views, why the dishonesty? You obviously grew up with Democrats or have some emotional connection to them that includes their hatred of Republicans. Why does it bother you to admit that? That's why I can't stop screwing with you over this, the dishonesty. If you addressed it honestly once, I'd say OK and move on

Have you EVER actually voted for libertarian?

I didn't think so.